president is ineligible for a second term. i don't know where the origin of that was and i'm just curious. i believe commissioner caen that maybe, i'm asking about the election of officers and how it's a one-year term and you can't serve an additional second year term. just the origin of that and whether that seems to be a policy that the commission feels like is a good one. >> well, it has been the policy of the commission ever since i recall. and the idea behind it, or one of ideas behind it is that if one serves as an officer, they get to know the commission limp as you go from being a president, you're still very involved in the commission and the business. it rotates the power so there's not one person that has the power and give us more of a sense of belonging.

>> yeah. i mean, i was just wondering if two years or there's the opportunity to serve a second year would be of interest to the commission? >> one of problems with a two-year rule is under the current one-year rule, within somebody's term of office, the odds are pretty good they will be chair. because people come and go. not everybody serves the full term. just historically, that happens. so for the reasons that commissioner caen said, where there's value in having that experience and the sense of skin in the game, that's best served with a one-year rule and not a two-year rule. it has been, it is also a rule of order that can be suspended by the commission and there have been times in our past when the commission for a specific reason

has chosen to do that. i think, i mean my own sense it's a pretty good rule. and i welcome the election. it will give me a little bit of a breather. >> as vice president, if the president is not around, has to assume the duties. >> yes, ma'am. any other thoughts or comments. this is not an action item that will come back to us. >> i can't find words you can't serve more than one term. >> rule number six. >> here we have a com for four- terms. it's conceivable that either one of three could be in line to be vice president or president again. but if they serve in that capacity, then who do we go to?

noreen? no. it says consecutive. >> okay. okay. all right. i misunderstood. >> all right. >> and there have been commissioners -- how many times have you served as president of the commission? >> um, i have served four times and each time it's been sort of unusual. like i served for a year and a half because something was wrong or somebody went off the commission. it's just the way it is. but as if we keep on succession and the three of us that have been reappointed perhaps, we would be in succession to be president as it turns out. and some people don't like to serve as president. there's always that possibility. >> and in that case, the rules become suspended and somebody

else assumes. >> if someone didn't want to serve, they could decline and goes next to the rotation. if you wanted to do something, i mean the specific prohibition. you could suspend the rules and that has been done. >> great. thank you. any public comment on this issue? this is not an action item. okay. thank you. and this is if something comes up or you want to you know suggest a change, then we have time to think about that and deal with that as well. >> okay. and back to the agenda. that concludes item six. next is the report of general manager. >> harlan kelly, general manager.

first of all, iment wanted to t the commission for their support. it has been a pleasure serving under ed. one thing mr. harrington has left in place is a good team. i am looking forward to serve the commission with the team to do great things. so with that, i have the privilege to have a very short general manager's report by saying that's it. thank you. [laughter] >> that's right. we may get used to that. thank you. is there any public comment on item 6? i believe there's not a bawsca report. >> correct.

we will move on to the citizen's advisory update. >> hello, commissioners, mr. kelly congratulations. so we have been making some good progress. we now have 16-17 seats filled. >> great. >> that's been making it very smooth to get quorum. we have been having meetings. in the past three months passed four resolutions and starting to move on to doing resolutions and sending them forward. we're trying to coordinate better with your advance calendar. mr. moran and i talked about moving the meeting. i don't think there will be a big objection. we don't want to be seen as a stop light. but a way to gain input from the

community. we have one vacancy that has been vacant for 18 months, the mayor's large water appointment and it's been difficult. we put a few people forward. i think there are a lot of conflicts in anyone who has any business before the cpuc or the sfpuc is oftentimes conflicted out. we have a couple people that might fill that vacancy. i made a couple changes. we formed a new subcommittee, which is going to be headed by alex landsburg. he's going to not meet every month, but have a quarterly meeting and kind of look at those issues that are very important to the community. replacing, he was the wastewater subcommittee chair and he's being replaced by javier pruit

hill, who is a recent appointee and the water commit, david pillpel will be heading the water committee. i'm sure you will have lots of procedural comments that will come out of that committee. it will be good to have new blood come out of that committee and we're going to give that a try. the power subcommittee will be run by doug cane. the resolutions that came forward. a resolution in support of alternative nonpotable water. it was brought forward and i think hasn't been voted on by the supervisors yet. we had a resolution and support of ssip validation program and also an excess land policy that

was related to the francisco reservoir. pending, we are going to also look at our rules of order. we currently have the ability to change our rules of order and something that's been detrimental. we have an attendance policy, but it's in practice very difficult to follow because if puts our secretary in a very awkward place where our secretary needs to contact someone she doesn't want to contact and let them know their appointee hasn't shown up. nicole and a lot of other committees have worked around that, if you're a non-excused no-show. you will be deemed to be resigned and easier to reach out to the appointing person to fill

those seats. we have three or four people that habitualy not been attending. there are a lot of people in the community that would like to work on giving input to you on how things run. the topics we're expecting to look at in various degrees over the next three months, we have some issues, some talks about how the puc reaches out and communicates about construction going on around the ssip and the water and how that impacts the community. we have been pleasantly surprised with great communications that have come out. we will look at rates and we have some community benefits conversations a little bit about the southeast community center, and do you have any questions or

comments for us? >> i do. um, good to see you. there has been some discussion lately surrounding notification with respect to clean power sf. i am curious about whether the committee would be open to studying and gaging interest in various different means of communication for notifying folks especially those in the low-income brackets. not that we have any notification prepared, but to just kind of consider and ponder that we have to pretty quickly begin discussing mechanisms for notification in various languages and mediums whether electronic, fliers,

advertisements, whatever it is. if the committee was open to agendizing that. not that if would have to be agendized as an action item, but discussion item to see if the committee was interested in taking up that issue. i think it could result in real voluminous discussion. but i think it would be certainly helpful to us if we were able to get information back from such a brought committee, it would give us kind of a really starting point and then we could work from there. i would be curious to know how you felt about that topic? and how you felt about bringing it to your committee. >> well, i will bring it up this evening. i tend to leave it up to the

committee to talk about what they will like to talk about. and, but i think it has been a hot topic, both communication and the clean power sf. we were -- we had a little bit of a miss fire. we were going to have a resolution in support of clean power. now it's a moot point, our initial discussion on clean power, we had more questions than we had answers. so we were going to talk about it again this evening. but since the board of supervisors passed it and what appears to be an unvetoable vote, we're not going to continue on with our support of it. but i think the communication piece is something that would be outstanding. it seems like it's perfect for us and i appreciate that we're looking for good things that we can have meaningful input that's helpful. i will absolutely bring it up this evening and see if we can

get a discussion going >> thank you. >> thank you. >> i wanted to follow up. so there's a power committee of the c.a.c.? >> a sub committee. >> i think it's a good idea and maybe there's a way, would have to happen in relatively short order. i know external affairs and juliet's shop is working to put together a strategy. if a set of recommendations could come forward from the committee to supplement the work that external affairs is doing, we would love that. >> thank you. because we know each other, i didn't want to speak for the commission, obviously, but i was thinking out loud. i appreciate that. >> thank you. >> yes ms. jackson.

i'm going to be very short. espinola jackson. the c.a.c., when it was set up, was set up under the water department. the meetings were being held on felts. they are being held to market street and it's very inconvenient for those of us where the sewage plant is and all the discussion is going on is not held in the community. i would like for the c.a.c. to take note of the fact that they could hold some of their meetings in bay view, hunter's point where the discussion is going on about. i remember when lanceburg was one of first members on the committee years ago. he had moved to bayview hunters point. i would like to see the people

from bayview hunter's point that live in the community be on that committee. i also would like to state that p.u.c. has a department that contacts everyone that receives a bill. i just got one after standing up here talking to you all the last time to see what we income is. and whether or not i could stay on the same. you have a department sending out notification for those of us that are low income and senior citizens. i just wanted to make that clear. i said to myself, i said, may may have been listening to me talk. now they want to know what my income is. i let them know. i get the $981 a month. >> thank you. i saw terence making notes.

any other public comment? seeing none. madam secretary. would you call the consent calendar. item 10 a, accept the work performed by s.j. amorosa construction company for contract wd-2573. and contract wd-2445. >> and c, accept work performed contract wd 2504, approve modification two decreasing by $1,844,000 $637.

and contract wd 501 western addition of beach marina. >> and approve ww513, increasing the contract duration 90 consecutive days. >> any items to be moved? >> moved and seconded. any discussion? all in favor. >> aye. >> the item carries. >> do you have any public comment on item 10? >> i'm sorry? >> do we have public comment on item 10? >> it always confuses me on a consent calendar item, which is basically not to talk about, do you need to talk about it? >> you need to invite public comment in case somebody wants to bring something to your attention. >> is there any public comment

on the consent calendar? thank you. if we could call item 11. yes. 11. >> item 11, prove project cuw37403, san antonio back up pipeline in the sunol area of alameda county, california, and authorize the general manager to implement the project. >> commissioners, any -- >> commissioners. any >> general manager. >> fine. >> any questions? we have the material in front of us. would you like a presentation? or do i have a motion? >> i will move it. >> it's moved. >> second. >> and seconded. >> any discussion? >> if i may take one second if i

may to thank scott mcpherson, the project manager on this. he slugged through this many times and did a great job. vivian chow, the project manager as well is also here. congratulations to both. >> here we have a motion and second. >> any public discussion? seeing none, all in favor. >> aye. >> the item carries. >> item 12, prove the terms and conditions and authorize the general manager to execute a purchase and sales agreement with serving evans street for approximately 4.68 acres for 15 million subject to approval by the board of supervisors and mayer. >> yes, ms. russell.

>> good afternoon, welcome general manager and commissioners. my i have the over head please? i am rosana russell, real estate services. it's my great pleasure to ask your approval to purchase a 4.6 acre property in 330 new hall street in san francisco for $15 million. the seller is third and evans, l.l.c. this is a correction from the agenda. the property is improved with two building built in 1978 and a large parking lot. the two buildings have two street addresses. the first is 1550 evans. a two story steel frame office building with 31535 square feet.

the second is at 330 new hall street and contains approximately 15,000 square feet of space. it has a large parking lot, which would allow parking for approximately 200 vehicles. the property is located in the bay view district of san francisco and a five minute walk from our water pollution control plant. i will show you a map. we had the property appraised in march of this year. has a fair market value of $16 million. the city and county of san francisco's real estate division approved this. it was approved in 2012-2013

capital budget. this is a correction on the original item. we seek to have the wastewater as the primary user. >> in what form? >> if i may go on. the staff is presently located in numerous temporary work locations. some leased, some trailers. >> to consolidate all of them. >> move it, mr. chairman. we have a motion and a second. >> i'm sorry. i didn't hear you. you guys need to speak into these, >> move it. [laughter] >> and i do appreciate your comments. anything that involves $15 million of property acquisition deserves mentioning. so we have a motion and a second. any further discussion? >> i did note there are a couple of errors in the resolution. do we need to correct those? we have a substitute resolution? >> yes, we do.

with the concurrence of the mover and second, we would have that applied to the substitute? >> i have a >> yes. commissioner caen. >> is this the property that's been on the market for time? >> yes, ma'am. >> was the appraised value back three years, five years more? >> yes, it was. but at this time, i don't recall the exact earlier appraisal. of course, we got a recent apraisal before we entered into the agreement to purchase it. the draft agreement to purchase it. >> i don't know very much about real estate, but the way i figure this out, is for the square footage for the two buildings, it's running $296 a square foot. i don't know how one evaluates

the parking but, for this area, that seems a little high for me. >> i am not an apraiser. i am happy to provide you with a copy. we rely on a city-appointed appraiser we have used before. >> in 2006, p.p.w. was asked to look at this property that has been on sale for a very long time, commissioner caen, at the time, it came in at $60 million. >> just to be clear, the report shows that the $16 million apraisal was done in march of 2012. >> any other questions? >> i assume that the, for the building, the $296 a square foot, is fair and reasonable?

>> we believe it's fair and reasonable. we also vetted this with john updike, head of city real estate who approved the purchase price. it's part of our obligation to meet and confer with city real estate on transactions of this magnitude. we did this early on. >> well, i think it's a great location. i have seen the building and it certainly land that we need and building that we need. so. >> thank you. yeah, given the amount of work they are going to be doing in that area. an extra footprint would be nice. any public comment? >> ms. jackson? >> i will like to say this is very good. you know, it takes me back when it was under the water department. the water department staff.

that's where they were. it's great to see that all of the staff of puc in that area will be in one location. it's very good for the department. and i just like because see i go a long way back. i can speak about and i asked the director a minute ago about something i brought up about the meetings of the c.a.c. to be brought back to bayview, hunter's point. mr. bryant. >> president moran and board members, first of all, this is a great building. i want to, you know, i didn't come here to speak on the building. over time, i have always asked why it wasn't being used. as somewhat younger employee in

the city and county of san francisco. i was taken out to that location by none other than leeroy king and met alex pitcher, whose office it was at one time. i said this to many folks, this is a, he gives me a chance to get it and i'm buying it. i'm glad the p.u.c. is now reconsidering it. and i just wanted to say that if you do reclaim it, let's not just consider that alex pitcher has a room over an 1800 oak dale, but let's consider alex pitcher being an institution there and at one time it was water department. i guess. d.p.w. >> yeah. so, i ask that you pass this

measure and please, do not hesitate to pass this measure. this is a great buy. thank you. >> my lip reading was failing me on that. okay. any other public comment? seeing none. we have a motion and second. all in favor. aye. >> oppose? >> the item carries unanimously. >> item 13. >> adopt the final mitt grated negative declaration mitigation monitoring report program and findings as required by the california environmental quality act for the gary road replacement project and approve project c uw 26403. gary road bridge replacement in the